|
Two problems with the remarks below.
1) Those previous votes spoken of below (SUMO, IFF?)
didn't fail, but were ruled to have passed by the Chair. I don't know that the
Chair has, in fact, been over-ruled. Also, note that the e-mails from the Chair
regarding these earlier votes specified a 'more restrictive' voting method than
the IEEE method.
2) If it should be determined that an invalid
voting procedure has in fact been used previously, then all votes conducted
under that procedure must be deemed invalid, and votes reconducted under a valid
procedure.
Jay
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004
06:06
Subject: RE: P&P: RE: How votes are
counted
Dear
Bob,
In not
including failed votes in the list of resolutions, I was following the
precedence of the ISO committee I am associated with, ISO
TC184/SC4.
We could choose
to do something different, but I think the approach is sound. A failed vote
means nothing. It is only passed votes that have significance. The record of
failed votes is there in the archives for those who are
interested.
Matthew West
Principal Consultant
Shell Information
Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United
Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email:
matthew.west@shell.com
Internet: http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk
Matthew,
In the section of the SUO web page
titled Resolutions, I think it is appropriate to list all of the motions
that have resulted in a vote including those that have failed. This
gives a better perspective of the WG's activities. Two SUMO motions
have failed - the original one and the one offered last
summer.
Bob
West, Matthew R SITI-ITPSIE wrote:
Dear Bob
and Jim,
Well I've
had a look at this and it seems reasonably clear to me that the By-Law
below applies to us and so we require a majority of voting members for a
motion to pass.
As I recall
Jim's objection to this is that no other committee votes in this way.
However, I suspect we are the only committee that works entirely by
e-mail, and that is what causes the difference (except when other
committees have a letter ballot).
I should
perhaps make my own position clear. I am relatively indifferent as to
which voting process we use as a matter of principle. My experience is
that people adapt their behaviour to make a voting process work
reasonably. However, what I am concerned about is that there should be
uncertainty about how votes are counted. Then people do not know what the
effects of their behaviour will be.
So Jim, do
you accept that our voting is governed by the By-Law quoted below? If not
please give a rationale.
Also, if
you do not, what action do I have to take to challenge your decision so
that we can get this sorted out?
If we
accept this process below, then looking back the SUMO - and I suspect
the IFF vote would have failed (though the numbers of voting members were
not declared in the published ballot result). What do we do about those
votes?
Matthew West
Principal Consultant
Shell Information
Technology International Limited
Shell Centre, London SE1 7NA, United
Kingdom
Tel: +44 20 7934 4490 Mobile: +44 7796 336538
Email: matthew.west@shell.com
Internet:
http://www.shell.com
http://www.matthew-west.org.uk
Matthew,
I spoke to a
member of the IEEE -SA staff who confirmed that in our case (a
vote without a meeting, e.g. e-mail) an affirmative vote of a majotity
of all the voting members is required. The reference is the IEEE
By-Laws, 1-300 Management, 1-300 General, 1. Governance;
Parliamentary Procedures, 4. Action of the Board of
Directors and Committees. (4) below:
(4) Unless otherwise provided in the Certificate of
Incorporation, the Constitution, these Bylaws, or the Not-for-Profit
Corporation Law of the State of New York, any action required or
permitted to be taken by any board or committee of any organizational
unit of the IEEE (other than the Board of Directors, the Executive
Committee, the Major Boards, the Standing Committees and any other
board or committee reporting directly to the Board of Directors) may
be taken without a meeting. Unless a more restrictive voting requirement is
specified in the governing documents of the board or
committee, an affirmative vote of a majority of all the voting
members of the board
or committee shall be required to approve the action. The results of the vote shall be
confirmed promptly in writing or by electronic transmission. The
writings and/or electronic transmissions shall be filed with the
minutes of the proceedings of the board or committee. ?Electronic transmission? means any form of electronic
communication, such as e-mail, not directly involving the
physical transmission of paper, that creates a record that may be
retained, retrieved and reviewed by a recipient thereof, and that may
be directly reproduced in paper form by such a
recipient.
The IEEE By-Laws can be
viewed at
http://www.ieee.org/portal/index.jsp?pageID=corp_level1&path=about/whatis/bylaws&file=i-300.xml&xsl=generic.xsl
It is clear that the SUMO vote failed.
Bob
|